Year 1 pupils in schools adopting Mathematics Mastery scored on average +0.10 standard deviations higher on the Number Knowledge post-test, an effect not statistically significant at the 5% level¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Children who received the Mathematics Mastery intervention scored, on average, +0.10 standard deviations higher on the Number Knowledge post-test, reaching significance only at the 10% level (t = 1.82; p = 0.07), so chance cannot be ruled out. → Vignoles et al. 2015

Evidence¶

Vignoles et al. 2015¶

Anna Vignoles, John Jerrim, Richard Cowan. (2015). Mathematics Mastery: Primary Evaluation Report. Education Endowment Foundation. http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/library/maths-mastery-primary

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Clustered RCT with school-level randomisation across two cohorts; OLS regression of standardised Number Knowledge post-test on treatment with pre-test covariate, standard errors clustered at school level. The report estimates the effect as equivalent to approximately two months' additional progress, but it is not statistically significant.

"Children who received the Mathematics Mastery intervention scored, on average, +0.10 standard deviations higher on the post-test. This, however, only reached statistical significance at the 10% level (t = 1.82; p = 0.07), with the 95% confidence interval ranging from -0.01 to +0.21."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Combining this Year 1 trial with a second randomised controlled trial of Mathematics Mastery in Year 7 yields a statistically significant average impact of one additional month's progress — related
• The effect of Mathematics Mastery did not differ significantly between children with different levels of prior achievement — related
• An additional analysis using Key Stage 2 administrative test scores also found indeterminate, close-to-zero effects for Year 6 pupils. — related
• Additional mathematics instruction received by six intervention children did not produce significantly different posttest scores — related